Search results

Abstract
Recent scholarship has followed Glenn Morrow in seeking to understand Plato's politics in light of his cosmology. This essay takes a different tack and interprets the theology and cosmology of the Laws as an outgrowth of the Athenian Stranger's conversation with Kleinias, which focuses on politics and warfare. In that sense the arguments of Book 10 are closely tied to the context of the dialogue. The Athenian Stranger's religious ideology is not designed to be permanent or universally applicable. Rather, it is intended for an audience that finds itself immersed in an unhealthy world of motion, disorder, and antagonism.

Polybius' Histories , written in the mid—second century BC, offers an authoritative account of Rome's rise to uncontested imperial supremacy. The work has been highly influential among political thinkers because of its theory of the "mixed constitution." This essay proposes to return Polybius' mixed constitution to its proper location within the narrative of the Histories. This interpretative approach enables us to appreciate Polybius' frequently neglected emphasis on the connections between republican politics and Roman imperial power. These connections shed light on recent developments in republican political theory. They also lead to an investigation of the didactic purposes of the author, who intended to educate the Roman aristocracy in the virtues necessary for exercising hegemonic power successfully in the ancient Mediterranean world.

Previous scholars and writers have either celebrated the idealism in Plato's Laws or denounced its totalitarianism. Ryan K. Balot, by contrast, refuses to interpret the dialogue as a political blueprint, whether admirable or misguided. Instead, he shows that it constitutes Plato's greatest philosophical investigation of political life. In this transformative re-appraisal, Balot reveals that Plato's goal was to cultivate a tragic attitude toward our political passions, commitments, and aspirations.

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Preface and Acknowledgments -- Abbreviations -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Greed in Aristotle's Political Thought -- 3. Solonian Athens and the Archaic Roots of Greed -- 4. Herodotus and the Greed of Imperialism -- 5. Thucydides, Greed, and the Breakdown of Political Community -- 6. "Revolution Matters"? Oligarchic Rebellion and Democratic Hegemony in Athens -- 7. Epilogue: Plato's Republic in Context -- Bibliography -- Index Locorum -- General Index

In this careful and compelling study, Ryan K. Balot brings together political theory, classical history, and ancient philosophy in order to reinterpret courage as a specifically democratic virtue. Ranging from Thucydides and Aristophanes to the Greek tragedians and Plato, Balot shows that the ancient Athenians constructed a novel vision of courage that linked this virtue to fundamental democratic ideals such as freedom, equality, and practical rationality. The Athenian ideology of courage had practical implications for the conduct of war, for gender relations, and for the citizens' self-image

"While ancient Greek thought is widely acknowledged as the major source of political ideals such as freedom and equality, ancient Greek practices including slavery, the subordination of women, and imperialism have been condemned as undemocratic and immoral. So is ancient Greek political thought still relevant today? In this wide-ranging history, Ryan Balot shows what ancient Greek political texts might mean to citizens of the twenty-first century."--Provided by publisher

Abstract
Scholars generally agree that, according to Aristotle, factionalizers are motivated by a sense of injustice (the 'first cause') to redress imbalances in wealth and honor (the 'second cause'). Recent discussions, however, have offered a misleading interpretation of Aristotle's third cause, which he identifies as the origin of the factionalizers' sense of injustice. It involves, most importantly, greed, hubris, and other factors such as fear and 'disproportionate growth'. In conversation with a recent publication in Polis, this article restores the third cause to its proper place in Aristotle's account. Abusive power holders, driven by greed, hubris, and overreaching, oppress their fellow citizens – following in the tradition of Homer's Agamemnon, Hesiod's basileis, and Solon's aristocrats. These power holders prompt a sense of anger, indignation, and injustice in their fellow citizens, who ultimately form factions and take action on their own behalf.